The Science Daily publication mentioned a study done in 2009, saying that REAL gay people are attracted to manly, masculine, men. Here is a story on the study: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091030125044.htm

More than 99 percent of men in the world, find manly, muscular, hairy men, with square jaws, to be sexually unattractive. Gay organizations are fully aware of this fact - that most men are sexually turned on by feminine characteristics, not masculine ones.

Gay advocates therefore focus on promoting extremely feminine men in the popular culture, men who are difficult to tell apart from women, when they have their clothes on. When heterosexual men find themselves attracted to extremely feminine men, the gay advocates label these heterosexual men as being closeted or latent gay men.

In the world of pornography, they promote the so-called shemale/transsexual pornography. This pornography involves using men who look exactly like women, because they have had breast implants, and take female hormones. The only thing that separates such men from female supermodels, is that they have a p@nis, rather than a v@gina. When heterosexual men are attracted to such sexually ambiguous men, they are labelled "gay".

I suspect that REAL gay men, who are attracted to manly men, are indeed "born that way". But such REAL gays make up less than 1 percent of the population of the world.

But most so-called "gay" people, are normal heterosexual men who have been tricked into labelling themselves "gay", because they are attracted to men with feminine qualities.

It is well known that prominent heterosexual men in politics, business, showbiz, journalism, etc., have had brief encounters with shemale prostitutes. They are, therefore, afraid of criticizing the gay agenda, because they fear exposure.

Many prominent heterosexual liberal men have the usual disgust that normal men have, at the idea of two masculine men having sex with each other.

But they have a more accepting attitude towards lesbian porn and shemale porn. This creates the opening, that enables gay organizations to ram their agenda through, without significant opposition.

By exposing sex scandals involving conservative clergymen and pro-family Republican activists, the pro-gay forces in the media intimidate the rest of society into silence, when the gay marriage agenda is being pushed forward.

We therefore, need to redefine a "gay" person as a man who is exclusively attracted to masculine men, in order to get the men who live in the "grey areas" to the pro-family side. The so-called GLBT coalition needs to be spit up, to isolate the gays from their LBT allies.

>>>Umm. Tops and Bottoms are both gay. I have no idea where youre going with this line

I agree with you. All forms of homosexual behavior are immoral. But I am just trying to explain how a tiny minority in America, has managed to ram their agenda through the state legislatures, courts, and the federal government, without encountering significant opposition from prominent Americans. When ordinary Americans have been given a chance to vote in state ballot initiatives, they have overwhelmingly rejected the gay agenda. I am trying to explain why the gay agenda is succeeding, despite the opposition of the majority of the American people.

Part of the con is based on the same principle that hustlers everywhere use: you can’t cheat an honest man.

Many males of the species have encounters with the same sex as part of their maturation process. These things largely fade from consciousness, and when questioned as an adult, most males would deny any such thing happened.

So when accusations are brought up, that a man is of homosexual tendencies, there is immediate denial, followed by a sense of shame and vulnerability, as these past escapades are re-ignited and become exaggerated. At this point, even the straightest of arrows begins to doubt his previously unchallenged masculinity, and falls victim to this emotional blackmail. Once compromised, it is easy to then make further and further demands, to the degree that almost everything the victim once believed is called into question, and this is reflected in the way in which many issues are addressed.

A LOT of our politicians and public figures have gone through such a series of compromise and intimidation, making them much less of a human being than they once were.

The article you reference as source material has almost nothing to do with your nonsensical post. The point of the study was to show that men and women have differing ideas of beauty regardless of sexual preference. Everything in your post seems to be pure conjecture on your part.

11
posted on 01/13/2012 8:19:50 AM PST
by LanaTurnerOverdrive
("I've done a lot of things in my life that I'm not proud of. And the things I am proud of are disgus)

One of the main reasons that homosexuals were banned from the military was fear of blackmail from the enemy.

Beyond that, nearly all of the "committed" homosexuals I have met/known have problems. They are manic/depressive or bipolar, they are addicts, or they have perverse/dangerous fetishes or habits.

I can't say if committing the homosexual act regularly is the cause of other mental problems, or if it is a symptom - but either way, homosexuality and mental illness, in my view, almost always are found together.

Homosexuality is an act. A perverted abominable sexual act. Its a behavior choice. Its not a part of who anyone is. The key to breaking up the perverts agenda is to not argue the debate on their terms, or accept their definitions for the perversion.

Exactly. . .a most important point. . . thus the movement for "gay rights" is nothing more than an effort to impose upon society, by force, acceptance of an immoral and dysfunctional behavior that is clearly not in the interest of society.

Ooh, I don’t think so. I really, really don’t think that a guy being anally penetrated by another man’s member (even if the penetrator has fake tits) can claim not to be gay. Ditto a man fellatiating another man, or being fellatiated by same.
You are using the Latino macho excuse of “I’m not gay, the guy submitting to me is.” Por favor. It’s pathetic.

The elites in the US are immoral and many are perverts. Of various kinds. And no one is “born gay”. But there are no doubt many perverts of all kinds larding the elite class - media, “entertainment”, DC elitists, state, sports etc. Look at the Sandusky situation - every one knew, no one did anything. How many more were involved in buggering countless boys? No doubt more than just Sandusky.

4 posted on Friday, January 13, 2012 10:02:45 AM by Coldwater Creek: “One of the main reasons that homosexuals were banned from the military was fear of blackmail from the enemy.”

Absolutely right.

It's probably unrealistic, but I very much hope a Republican president and Congress can reinstitute the ban on open homosexuals in uniform. Maybe widespread publicity to the participation of the Wikileaker in blatantly homosexual hacker groups will help.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.